Devsingh Naik S/O Thavarya Naik vs Kamala Bai W/O Sri. Devsingh Naik on 12 July, 2010

[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Devsingh Naik S/O Thavarya Naik vs Kamala Bai W/O Sri. Devsingh Naik on 12 July, 2010

Bench: Subhash B.Adi

W1"

IN THE I-IIGI-I COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE
DATED THIS THE }2"' DAY OF JULY, 2010
BEFORE

THE HONBLE IVIRJUSTICE SUBHASH B 
CRIMINAL PETITION No.1 n2/20  I  " 

BETWEEN:

S3:i.Devsingh Naik

S/0 Thavarya Naik

Age: 54» yeas

Now working as Dy.S.P

State Intelligence Department

Police Head Quarters

Nmpathunga Road    _ V  " "

Bangalore: City.   _   g    ....P'£TITIONER

 --------  . : 1':.5»'3r.;t"»3>~gji;.G:§.'Ea1ﬁgan.ruidhar, Adv.)

AND:

Smt.Kama12§L'. _ _ V
W/0 Sri.-DeVsir1gh_Nav1k '-

 , Aged~a'.b01it 44 ye2i1*s  _
V "R/A0 E'\'0.152?7I' 15m Crciéé
".'VRnQp3 Nagar>._  
Aﬁhogadi .,Ga_ddige Road

Mysore'
Also at

 -- No.13:31,"*--5'-"°Main
 ~  V 'E~B10Ck, _II'3~Stage
 A " Rajajinagéir
  560 010. ...RESPONDENT

(By Sri. Chandrashekar Roddanavar, Adv.) THIS CRIMINAL PI:i'.TI'I'ION ES FILED UNDER SEZCTION 407 CR.P.C PRAYJNG THAT THIS HONBLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO WITPIDRAVV THE CASE BEARING C.MES.NO.62'7/08 PENDING BEFORE THE JMF'C~EI COURT, AT MYSORE FILED BY THE rm' '2' RESPONDENT UNDER Sf5ZC'l'lON 12(1) OF 'I'HE PROTECTION OF DOMES'i'lC VIOLENCE ON WOMEN ACT. 2005 AND TO TRANSFER THE SEMI3 TO ANY OTHER MAGISTRATE COURT AT BAi\iCrALORE FOR 'i"'R1AI..

THIS PETITION COMENG ON FOR ADMESSION 'l'l"IIS_gDAYt'"~.l.'HE COURT MADE THE FOLLOW'lNG: * , " -. V Petitioner who is respondent in {old A No.C.l\/£isc.28/2008}. has filed this seeking the said petition from the Jl\/li+"€:f~'i~IpbCotirt., Court, Bangalore.

2. Learned evounselpwfovir llietitionerjpsubmits that, the respondent, has the Family Court, /~ per month and she had i'iled:VV'2','=i fietitlion: oi" the said suit to Mysore In Civil Petition"NOLSCC/'2€l0fEiand the said Civii Petition has been " * "CVOLE!7T...0bS€I'Vi11g that. the respondent has been V'--..1fesild'1ra.g " Batrigetlore and no purpose would be served in

3." Vi;e~a1'ned Counsel appearing for the respondent submits V' address of the house shown in earlier proeeedhigs does beiong to the respondent. Temporarily she was staying there. it now she is staying in Mysore. Mysore is the piaoe of the parents and further submits i.hat. she being the permanent. resident of =z= 'r;-./W -3- Mysore. she caI11"1ot be made to run to Bangalore to C()1'1dLlCt this case.

4. As far as the tr2msI'e1' of the suit is Concerned. this W Court has rejected the said petition for transfer.fiiwoiareizer, respondent has shown the address at Mysore,"SheiTVVbeiii1g""a woman. I' do not find any justit'ieat,i.on, »iio..traI1sfe1'vthéiiz e'as_'_e;e1r:_d V make her to run {Torn Mysore to Bs11g1a&lor:'e'.i 'ir1stie~21d' of the it is appropriate to direct the learrred.. Magistrate to "of the V it matter as early as possible not l'c1L'E";'I_'VVn'('h_ci1i"~,|._» three mo_nths from the date of receipt 01' Copy Vo"£'.ai~ises under the Protection of Women from Donlestie A\ﬂ.i.oIe.i7(:e"'z'Xe't. Petition dism.i'sse'd.._ : 7;

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court